Flashed by camera after roadworks removed.
Discussion
A question to the massive here in the plod and Law section.
On the way to work this morning travelling the same route as I do everyday, I was very surprised to find myself flashed by a forward facing Truvelo speed camera. The road is a dual carriage and is normally a 50 through the area where the speed camera is sited. However, roadworks had been in place over the last 7 weeks and the limit had been reduced down to 40. Knowing the camera was always there and not wishing to test any theory that the limits of cameras could be adjusted I always maintained the lower 40 limit. Imagine my joy this morning to discover the roadworks were no longer in force (road signs removed, cones removed etc). So I reverted back to my normal 50ish cruise and was horrified to get flashed by the Truvelo. I'm positive I was virtually on the mark I was going atno more than 53 according to my own speedo (I checked prior to the camera) so wouldn't have expected the camera to flash taking into account my speedo error and camera adjustments.
I have several questions regarding this episode, Can standard sited cameras be adjusted for different speeds whilst in-situ?
What information if any, can I collect to show that the 40 limit was no longer in force on the day in question, pictures etc.
I'm not massivly concerned more annoyed that if the camera has been adjusted and then not readjusted, how many people could this camera have caught.
On the way to work this morning travelling the same route as I do everyday, I was very surprised to find myself flashed by a forward facing Truvelo speed camera. The road is a dual carriage and is normally a 50 through the area where the speed camera is sited. However, roadworks had been in place over the last 7 weeks and the limit had been reduced down to 40. Knowing the camera was always there and not wishing to test any theory that the limits of cameras could be adjusted I always maintained the lower 40 limit. Imagine my joy this morning to discover the roadworks were no longer in force (road signs removed, cones removed etc). So I reverted back to my normal 50ish cruise and was horrified to get flashed by the Truvelo. I'm positive I was virtually on the mark I was going atno more than 53 according to my own speedo (I checked prior to the camera) so wouldn't have expected the camera to flash taking into account my speedo error and camera adjustments.
I have several questions regarding this episode, Can standard sited cameras be adjusted for different speeds whilst in-situ?
What information if any, can I collect to show that the 40 limit was no longer in force on the day in question, pictures etc.
I'm not massivly concerned more annoyed that if the camera has been adjusted and then not readjusted, how many people could this camera have caught.
A similar case happened in Luton where the road works had been completely cleared but the camera was still in place. The accused was found 'not guilty' as the temporary limit ends as soon as the obstruction is cleared.
If the carriageway was clear and the road works finished the limit does not apply. The CPS are unlikely to proceed with this if the case history at Luton is drawn to their attention.
If the carriageway was clear and the road works finished the limit does not apply. The CPS are unlikely to proceed with this if the case history at Luton is drawn to their attention.
The Road Works Limit of 40 would have been brought into being as the result of a Temporary Traffic Order and this will outline the dates of validity. Copy held by Local Authority Traffic Management Dept. No mention is made that the 40 signs were still up and even if they had been because the road works have been completed and signs down then the limit is out of the window because of the provisions of Direction 36 Traffic Signs and General Directions 2002:
Restrictions on the placing of temporary signs
36. The signs shown in Schedule 12,(speed limit is 670 at Schedule 2) other than in diagrams 7014, 7019, 7020, 7032 and 7103, may be placed only in connection with the execution of works on or near a road or a temporary obstruction thereon, and any such sign so placed and any other sign shown in a diagram in Schedules 1 to 11 (this includes 67-) so placed shall not be retained on or near the road after the completion of the works or the removal of the obstruction, as the case may be, unless -
(a) it is a sign of the type shown in diagram 7009(loose chippings), in which case that sign may be retained on or near a road after the completion of the works for so long as the traffic authority for the road thinks fit; or
(b) it is a sign of the type shown in diagram 7012 bearing the words "NO GIVE WAY MARKINGS" or "NO STOP MARKINGS", in which case that sign shall be removed as soon as the road markings have been replaced and in any event not later than 28 days after the completion of the works.
Whilst it could well be the camera was tweaked down to cater for the lower limit of the road works I doubt this will have occurred unless the works were of a very lengthy duration. Local Highways Dept of the area involved may advise if this was so.
Otherwise it is a 15 day sweat for the dreaded NOIP to the Reg Keeper which if it arrives will show either a 40 or 50 exceeded. If the former then you have grounds for contesting the unlawful limit. If the later that's another story......
dvd
Restrictions on the placing of temporary signs
36. The signs shown in Schedule 12,(speed limit is 670 at Schedule 2) other than in diagrams 7014, 7019, 7020, 7032 and 7103, may be placed only in connection with the execution of works on or near a road or a temporary obstruction thereon, and any such sign so placed and any other sign shown in a diagram in Schedules 1 to 11 (this includes 67-) so placed shall not be retained on or near the road after the completion of the works or the removal of the obstruction, as the case may be, unless -
(a) it is a sign of the type shown in diagram 7009(loose chippings), in which case that sign may be retained on or near a road after the completion of the works for so long as the traffic authority for the road thinks fit; or
(b) it is a sign of the type shown in diagram 7012 bearing the words "NO GIVE WAY MARKINGS" or "NO STOP MARKINGS", in which case that sign shall be removed as soon as the road markings have been replaced and in any event not later than 28 days after the completion of the works.
Whilst it could well be the camera was tweaked down to cater for the lower limit of the road works I doubt this will have occurred unless the works were of a very lengthy duration. Local Highways Dept of the area involved may advise if this was so.
Otherwise it is a 15 day sweat for the dreaded NOIP to the Reg Keeper which if it arrives will show either a 40 or 50 exceeded. If the former then you have grounds for contesting the unlawful limit. If the later that's another story......
dvd
I would advise going asap and getting some photos (pref date stamped) to show road works removed and absence or otherwise of signs showing limit in force.
Can you imagine if you wait the 14 days, NoIP arrives, you go back and road works back in place.
Photos and notes made in a timely fashion would aid a sworn statement as to the alleged facts as posted above, ie you remember the date, the incident, your speed, so concerned that you went back within x hours and made a permanent record of the situation.
2p
FiF
Can you imagine if you wait the 14 days, NoIP arrives, you go back and road works back in place.
Photos and notes made in a timely fashion would aid a sworn statement as to the alleged facts as posted above, ie you remember the date, the incident, your speed, so concerned that you went back within x hours and made a permanent record of the situation.
2p
FiF
Passed same camera again at 50 this morning (pushing my luck I know) and no flash.
I'm intrigued to know if permenent sited cameras are adjustable up and down (I'm assuming they would be)It must be easier and cheaper to adjust a camera if the limit gets varied rather than digging it up and spending £50,000 to replace it.
Thanks for all the answers by the way. Reference taking a photo, how do I prove I took it on the day I did?
I'm intrigued to know if permenent sited cameras are adjustable up and down (I'm assuming they would be)It must be easier and cheaper to adjust a camera if the limit gets varied rather than digging it up and spending £50,000 to replace it.
Thanks for all the answers by the way. Reference taking a photo, how do I prove I took it on the day I did?
tvrslag said:
Passed same camera again at 50 this morning (pushing my luck I know) and no flash.
I'm intrigued to know if permenent sited cameras are adjustable up and down (I'm assuming they would be)It must be easier and cheaper to adjust a camera if the limit gets varied rather than digging it up and spending £50,000 to replace it.
Thanks for all the answers by the way. Reference taking a photo, how do I prove I took it on the day I did?
are there lollipops telling you of this speed limit? Manchester ended up refinding fines und points over lolly being placed in wrong place... ist worth getting phot showing absence of lolly to tell you of limit in force.
Dear Jaakko
The fixed speed camera on the Eastbound A45 approach to Tollbar roundabout
near Ryton-on-Dunsmore was set to enforce the temporary 40mph speed limit
through the recent roadworks on this stretch of road. The roadworks were
removed on the evening of Wednesday 8th March at which point the speed
limit returned to the normal 50mph. Unfortunately there was a breakdown in
communications and Warwickshire Casualty Reduction Partnership were not
informed that the roadworks were being removed. Consequently the camera
remained set to enforce the temporary 40mph speed limit.
The problem was rectified at the earliest opportunity on Thursday morning.
Motorists who were flashed, but were not exceeding the 50mph limit during
Wednesday evening and Thursday morning, will not receive prosecution
notices and have nothing to worry about.
Kind regards
Stephen Rumble
Communications Manager
Warwickshire Casualty Reduction Partnership
The fixed speed camera on the Eastbound A45 approach to Tollbar roundabout
near Ryton-on-Dunsmore was set to enforce the temporary 40mph speed limit
through the recent roadworks on this stretch of road. The roadworks were
removed on the evening of Wednesday 8th March at which point the speed
limit returned to the normal 50mph. Unfortunately there was a breakdown in
communications and Warwickshire Casualty Reduction Partnership were not
informed that the roadworks were being removed. Consequently the camera
remained set to enforce the temporary 40mph speed limit.
The problem was rectified at the earliest opportunity on Thursday morning.
Motorists who were flashed, but were not exceeding the 50mph limit during
Wednesday evening and Thursday morning, will not receive prosecution
notices and have nothing to worry about.
Kind regards
Stephen Rumble
Communications Manager
Warwickshire Casualty Reduction Partnership
Wildcat
Thanks for the response , mein Liebe.
The problem that Jakko and I have is that ALL the previous roadwork signs and lower limit signs have been removed. The only signs now inforce appear to be the original 50mph permenent roadside signs. Hence the reason why we were both travelling at 50. How do we get pictures of signs no longer in place? And how do I prove that the lower limit signs were not in place on the day of the incident?
Any way this cameras never got any film in it.
Thanks for the response , mein Liebe.
The problem that Jakko and I have is that ALL the previous roadwork signs and lower limit signs have been removed. The only signs now inforce appear to be the original 50mph permenent roadside signs. Hence the reason why we were both travelling at 50. How do we get pictures of signs no longer in place? And how do I prove that the lower limit signs were not in place on the day of the incident?
Any way this cameras never got any film in it.
sean5302 said:
What's this about being flashed by a Truvelo?
My understanding is that they use infra-red, without light in the visible part of the spectrum, so as not to cause dangerous glare, or possibility of blinding.
www.speedcamerasuk.com/Truvelo.htm
They use a magenta filter (so as to not affect vision) but do still flash. They will be visible in certain conditions.
Of course if tvrslag was doing 53 (in what was now a 50mph limit with restrictions removed) they may continue to proceed with a conditional offer for exceeding the 50 limit, as they have the photographic evidence.
Dwight VanDriver said:
........but contrary to ACPO Speed Enforcement Guidelines i.e. ten percent plus two?
dvd
ACPO guidelines have never said that a prosecution shouldn't take place until 10% +2mph over the limit is exceeded. This is a common misconception.
What the guidelines say is that the minimum action that should be taken at 10% +2mph over the limit is issue of a FPN unless exceptional circumstances exist. There is nothing to stop prosecutions at any speed over the limit where there is sufficient evidence.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Friday 10th March 15:49
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff